It's time whaling became extinct

I am a huge fan of Japan, and have travelled there many times. I eat sashimi, I watch sumo, and I'm regularly mocked by my friends for pronouncing "karaoke" correctly. But there is one element of Japanese culture that leaves a sour taste in my mouth, and that's whaling. I have to admit, I've never tried whale meat – sorry, I mean, never conducted valuable primary whale research – so I don't know what I'm missing. But then again, I've never eaten human either, for similar moral reasons.

And what's more, the vast majority of Japanese people have never eaten whale either. According to an Asahi Shimbun survey from 2002, 96 per cent of Japanese have never eaten or rarely eat whale. And despite the protestations that it's a vitally important part of their culture, the lack of consumption has resulted in a substantial stockpile. And as a result a lot of the whale meat has started to be used for dog food. The Japanese Government has launched a campaign to try and encourage people to eat it, with a pamphlet series amusingly entitled "Scrumptious Whale Meat!", but it's failing. And no surprise – why bother with boring old whale meat when you now have universal access to the Teriyaki McBurger?

Kazuo Shima, Japan's former delegate to the International Whaling Commission was quoted in the SMH on Saturday as saying that the West had tried to turn the whale into the equivalent of a sacred cow. He's spot on. We want whales to be inviolate because many species are endangered, and the harpooning process is inherently cruel, resulting in a painful death. And we shouldn't apologise for that. There are times when it's important to maintain cultural relativism, and respect different countries' right to devise their own norms, but there are times when, frankly, one particular set of values is purely and simply better – in the case of the death penalty, for instance. Whaling, similarly, is one practice that simply shouldn't be tolerated.

What's more, the cultural argument seems fairly bogus. We aren't talking about a flotilla of small, traditional fishing boats using centuries-old techniques, like the Inuit whalers do. It's a modern, mechanised fleet, hunting thousands of kilometres from Japanese waters with a high-powered, high-tech explosive harpoon that kills more than 1000 whales. So really, the only bit of the cultural practice that is actually alive and well is the killing bit.

Shima accused the West of propagating WWII propaganda in portraying Japan as the villain. And while some uncomfortable memories remain around the region, the bottom line is that people do perceive Japan as the villain here, not because of the history, but because of its present actions. There's no point in arguing really, the simple fact is that whaling tarnishes Japan's reputation, much as nuclear testing tarnished France's in this region, and the only way around that is simply to stop.

Whenever I see footage of the Japanese whaling ships, I'm always amused because, if we're talking about propaganda, Japan's is so transparent. The word "RESEARCH" is painted in massive letters on the side, as if that somehow would reverse our perception that there isn't any scientific justification for slaughtering nearly a thousand minke whales. Honestly, what do you learn about the 935th dead whale that the first 934 didn't tell you?

Besides, scientific advances must always be weighed against ethical considerations. It's perverse to say that to properly research a species, you need to kill large quantities of them year after year. It's not surprising that most people in the West think Japan's whale research is primarily into how delicious they taste when lightly grilled in soy sauce.

Shima admitted that one of Japan's primary motivations was pride. That seems more convincing than the spurious research argument. And that's what needs to change. Of course Japan should be proud of its culture – most of it is wonderful. But Australia and other Western nations will never give ground on this, so it's come to the point where one antiquated practice, which doesn't even cater to modern Japanese culinary tastes, is doing Japan's reputation tremendous damage.

This year's whale hunt, with the now-annual pitched battles between the Japanese vessels and Sea Shepherd has descended into farce. Capturing protesters, the throwing of stink bombs, and the accusation of "terrorist attacks" from the Japanese – it's a whole lot of hassle just for a bunch of whale meat. Which is a brilliant strategy by Sea Shepherd, aboard its amusingly but aptly named ship, the Steve Irwin, which also gets uncomfortably close to its quarry. Personally, I'm probably more comfortable with the less provocative Greenpeace approach, but you have to admire Sea Shepherd's chutzpah. The Japanese have complained today that our Government has given the environmental groups "limousine service". Long may it do so.

Whaling has become purely a matter of principle for Japan, an obsession apparently disproportionate to its importance that even determines Japanese foreign policy, with aid being parcelled out to smaller nations in return for support at the International Whaling Commission. This behaviour, which smacks of bribery, is beneath a nation which is widely respected for its modern-day pacifism in world affairs. What's more, it must be costing Japan a fortune to keep producing this food that virtually no one wants to eat. Is it really worth infuriating the rest of the world and detracting from the reputation of an otherwise magnificent culture just so Japanese dogs can eat leftover whale?

Culture isn't destiny. Just because your country has always done something doesn't mean it needs to keep doing it. The area where I grew up in Sydney, around Neutral Bay, has a rich heritage as a whaling port – in fact, I grew up in Whaling Road. But guess what? We stopped doing it. It isn't that hard. Just as Britain needed to give up its empire, and India needs to continue working towards giving up the caste system, Japan needs to admit it's time it gave up whaling. That way, those like myself who have great affection for Japan need not have our affection so significantly blemished.

Posted
by Dom KnightJanuary 21, 2008 2:08 PM

LATEST COMMENTS

if it is for research then where are the results?

Posted by: karl on January 21, 2008 4:08 PM

The shame of whaling lies with the Intl Whaling Commission and the ability to buy off votes. How can land locked African nations decide the fate of whales?

Dont blame Japan if they are given rights by a higher authority to kill whales. I agree that it makes no sense for them to keep doing it but they dont want to "lose face".

Over haul the IWC now!

Posted by: AyDee on January 21, 2008 4:09 PM

I was in Tokyo last year sitting in a fiercely crowded sushi train, busy staring at the unloved dish that kept doing laps of the train track.

Sure enough it was whale.

So I tried it a few days later at another sushi place... and for a food that is causing so much political tension... it's rubbish.

Posted by: Russ on January 21, 2008 4:11 PM

Dom-san!

You ain't lived till you've chowed down on a whaleburger and chips, with a side serve of dolphin rings, at Humpback Hirohito's, 3 blocks north of the Sony building in Shinjuku.

One taste and you'll be laughing your ar$e off at all those Wannabe's wailing on about how good Wagyu Beef is...

Thar she blows!

The Sony building's in Ginza, otherwise I'd totally have tried it out.

Posted by: Mobi Dikksan on January 21, 2008 4:19 PM

If the French can ban cigarettes in cafes and if Australia can ban drink driving surely the Japanese can ban Whaling.

Posted by: Alison on January 21, 2008 4:27 PM

its nice to hear an argument against whaling that doesnt rely on emotive hyperbole. cruelty against animals is a core issue but concerns such as species conservation, international rep and inter-state relations are also important.

Posted by: franky on January 21, 2008 4:39 PM

Beautifully written Dom, one of your best pieces of work. Thanks.

Posted by: smeggers on January 21, 2008 4:43 PM

I used to work at a Japanese company and their culture is nothing if not dogmatic and stubborn. One of the reasons I was hired was to find more efficient ways of doing things, which I did- only to be then told to stick to the methods they already had in place, even where they were woefully inefficient. After a year I had to quit as my sense of logic was in danger of becoming eroded. I suspect that if the majority of Japanese themselves were to lobby for the abolition of whaling, it might actually happen. But the fact that it is only outsiders telling them what to do makes it a point of pride, which is why the procuring of whale meat continues despite the fact it obviously isn't even in demand.

I'm a little uncomfortable with the "dogmatic and stubborn" generalisation, but totally agree that the problem is that it's become a matter of national pride. So yes, perhaps the real challenge is to convince the Japanese public that it's a problem?

Posted by: franco on January 21, 2008 4:47 PM

So... if Dom's assertions are right, namely, that pride is one reason the Japanese are refusing to stop whaling, then it stands to reason that if we simply ignored their "whale research" for a few years, natural market forces would surely kick in and they'd stop of their own accord. Unless, of course, the research was genuinely useful. Our interference, although maybe saving a few mammals in the interim, just prolongs the agony. The poor whale is the meat in this cultural sandwich.

Not my assertion, a quote from the guy that represented Japan at the IWC. Pretty interesting admission I reckon. Plus, the whole thing's government subsidised in the national interest, so market forces will never apply.

Posted by: Chris on January 21, 2008 4:48 PM

I have been living in Japan for about a year. Whale meat is pretty good. Unlike most creatures of the sea that we eat it is a mammal, so it has fleshy goodness while also tasting mostly of fish. Quite unique and very tender.

"We want whales to be inviolate because many species are endangered,"
Not the Minke

"The harpooning process is inherently cruel, resulting in a painful death"
What about battery chickens? Seems their life is alot more miserable and cruel than the minkes that are free and live naturally until they reach full adulthood. Admittedly they get harpooned. Is that really so much worse than suffocating in a trawl net? Or creatures that die when we are dredging the sea floor. Many o f which we have no intention of using for anything - collateral damage?

I feel its a bit hypocritical isolating whales just because we dont want to eat them ourselves. It would be like India telling us not to eat beef.

The tradition argument should be taken seriously too. Its not like sushi was invented in Europe. You may have lived on Whaling Road, but did your parents or grand parents ever serve you whale? Its not what we are about, we are about livestock. But we should respect others.

There are countries that support whaling, other than Africa, - like Norway and Iceland. Funny isnt it, all sea going peoples from the Northern Hemisphere.

Just seems to be an overly emotive issue to me and a bit of ignorance on our part of other cultures, and what goes on behind the scenes for a meal. Vision of a whale being killed is a bit hard to take. But so would be a trip to the local slaugther house.

And I reckon illegally boarding another ship is stupid and dangerous in the extreme and basically feral.

Posted by: RowdyP on January 21, 2008 5:09 PM

ABC TV's Catalyst had a few noted bods do an assessment of Japan's whaling research last year & found almost no papers that passed the various tests for quality research. I've searched the Internet myself & the only stuff I found was about high levels of heavy metals in whalemeat used in school lunches (yep, that's one of the other places the surplus is going). Moreover there are vast areas of 'research' that can only be done with live subjects, eg about behaviour. I believe their research is supposed to be about what the whales are eating - well they should have worked that out by now. Pitiful.

Posted by: June Coombes on January 21, 2008 5:11 PM

Dom Knight needs to realize that whaling is the right of Japan. The oceans are owned by no one and whales in open water and even in the questionable Australian antarctic waters, are just the same as fish.
It's a sustainable resource and as such Japan has both the moral right and legal right to do as it pleases.
My experience with Japanese is that they manage resources far more wisely and much more beneficially than Australia.
That aside, imagine Australians being told they couldn't eat prawns because they were endangered on the basis of stacked pseudo scientific arguments. There'd be no hesitation in arrogantly displaying the index finger.
As to the two pirates who illegally boarded the Japanese vessel. I would have thrown them back in...with a nice bit of lead for added measure.
Arrogance needs a big stick. Just hope the Japanese don't whip one out!

It's hardly a question of whether Japan has ownership of the whales. And the claim that whaling is sustainable is dubious, or we wouldn't have had a global moratorium in the first place. The moral issue, which you don't actually address, is whether it is a humane thing to do.

Posted by: Harry Goto on January 21, 2008 5:48 PM

My Japanese wife fumes when she sees anything on Japanese whaling. She can't understand how stupid her own country must be.
My wife had whale meat once or twice when she was a young girl and didn't like it at all, it used to be considered a cheap and nasty food. It is now a "specialty" but the flavour hasn't changed, it still tastes awful; for the sake of some miserable food Japan destroys its relatively good name.
She reckons Australia ought to send its navy after them and I can't argue with that!

Posted by: William Jorgensen on January 21, 2008 5:48 PM

Of course it is not research - but that is our fault and not Japan's. Every time Japan say they are going to leave the IWC we ask them to stay and take their whales under the "scientific" whaling clause. I lived in Tokyo for three years and I asked many people about whale in a relaxed and friendly way. You know what? I never met a single Japanese person that had never tried it. If you can read the kanji for it, you will find it is in a lot of shops and izakayas - and not just local ones either. Tengu, the large national chain has "kujira bacon" in every store. And it sells well. Cans are in most supermarkets too.
There are other points to remember as well: minke whale is not by any stretch of the imagination endangered and the numbers they are taking are tiny compared to the population. It is hypocrisy for us to alert the world to the unscientific nature of their "scientific research" yet at the same time make appallingly unscientific claims about the numbers of minke whales. I accept that whaling involves cruelty - but compare it to industries where animals spend a lifetime in captivity as opposed to the freedom of whales. And what about net fishing, where all kinds of fish species, birds, turtles and dolphins have a lengthy and horrible deathin an undiscriminating net?? The "cruelty" of a fast, specifically targetted harpoon is clearly less cruel than many animal industries we accept without controversy. It also involves less unintended kills. We also hear many people refering to it taking place in "Australian Waters" - but they are only "Australian" in the sense that we took it upon ourselves to unilaterally declare a sanctuary in international waters - a claim that is not recognised in other countries. I am not arguing in favour of whaling - but I am saying that many of our often cited reasons for opposing it are false, shallow and embarrassing. In reality it is a complex debate and we need to treat it as such. If we want to stop whaling we must be very clear in our reasons. If we persist with childish and false arguments about sustainability, territory or cruelty we will NEVER get the Japanese to agree.

Posted by: gav on January 21, 2008 5:53 PM

Scientific whaling by Japanese is a joke. I do not understand why The International Whaling Commission allows whaling by the Japanese. Why are the "scientic methods" not checked by the commission????

It is time we do something to stop all this! Please sign the petition on

www.whalesrevenge.com

Posted by: Dutchie on January 21, 2008 5:54 PM

Imagine being a whale. You are just cruising around the globe,causing no harm,doing what you have been doing for 50 years or so and then all of a sudden you are dead meat and a useless piece of research.

This nonsense has to stop!

Posted by: SBW on January 21, 2008 5:58 PM

From my understanding, it's continued out being an old cultural thing. Did the Japs go down to the Antarctic Ocean in ye old times? Hardly. I'm sure they would have done it local offshore in whatever version boat they had...
Get over the cultural and scientific excuses and stop it.

Posted by: Warren on January 21, 2008 5:59 PM

"We stopped doing it. It isn't that hard"
Just on this point: The world has seen 2 whaling industries. The big one was the whaling industry for whale OIL. This is what Australia, Russia and many other countries did. This industry killed tens of thousands of whales every year, indiscriminately and pushed many species to the brink of extinction. Whale oil was used in many industrial applications as well as in nearly every perfume. This whale OIL industry came to an end when the major oil companies developed mineral oil substitutes (the cold war explains why Russia still did it after we stopped).
By contrast, the whaling industry for meat (Now Norway and Japan etc)always was and remains tiny.
Comparisons between Australian whaling and whaling for meat are not valid. It should also be noted that whaling for meat does not in any way risk a return to the old numbers required by whaling for OIL.

Posted by: gav on January 21, 2008 5:59 PM

Imagine being a Dingo or Kangaroo. You are just cruising around the plains,causing no harm,doing what you have been doing for xxxxx years or so and then all of a sudden you are dead meat.

This nonsense has to stop!

Posted by: jj on January 21, 2008 6:10 PM

If all the thousands of us worldwide who detest the idea of Japanese Whaling decided to declare a boycott on Japanese goods you would find that Corporate Japan would lean so heavily on their whalers that they would have to give the idea away or suffer a huge pain the the back pocket- the only place they feel any pain. Unlike the whales.
There's a site on Facebook that you can join -
'Boycott Japanese Goods Until They Stop Whaling'
which allows all of us to exercise one of the few powers that we have left, namely: how and where we choose to spend our money. Join now folks and let's stop this 'scientific' bull once and for all.

Posted by: Mark Lang on January 21, 2008 6:25 PM

There's no question that whaling wasn't sustainable in the past in various parts of the world.

But that is by no means a proof that whaling today and in the future is not and will not be sustainable.

It's a matter of hunting whales in a conservative manner so as to ensure that the numbers that are taken are no greater than the level that the stock can sustain being lost over a long period of time.

Even whales have sex and produce offspring like any other animal one may care to stick a knife and fork into. What's important is carefully determining how many whales can safely be taken (i.e., research) and then regulating the whaling operators appropriately to ensure that they stay within the rules. This is possible today in 2008.

Posted by: david on January 21, 2008 6:30 PM

Mark Lang - To make your boycott work it is a good idea to bring forward some valid and convincing reasons. Sure, we are capable of the direct action but we need to back it up. In my view, it is in this area that we are falling down.

Posted by: gav on January 21, 2008 6:43 PM

If whaling is stopped for good...

Greenpeace will lose multi millions of dollars of funding. Its annual pilgrimage to photograph whale deaths is a major public relations exercise for them. Greenpeace's advertisements that have been plastered all over the internet news sites are a major source of revenue for that organisation.

Isn't it funny to see ongoing news stories about Sea Shepherd, with advertisements to give money to Greenpeace right next to these stories on the same page...? Well, it's just more of Greenpeace typically cashing in on Sea Shepherd's work.

When whaling is stopped on any given day or season, it's usually because of bad weather, or Sea Shepherd turning up. Sea Shepherd founder and President, Paul Watson, has never seen a whale die since he left Greenpeace in 1977!!! Now that's a record! It takes a one-of-a-kind saint and genius to achieve that record.

Go Sea Shepherd!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Belinda on January 21, 2008 6:45 PM

Belinda - How about putting some actual reasons on the table before resorting to violence?

Posted by: gav on January 21, 2008 6:55 PM

Saw a comment about the challenge being convincing the Japanese public that whaling should end.

I figure that there are 3 basic categories of people:
1) Anti-whaling
2) Don't-mind-a-bit-of-whaling
3) Pro-whaling

Obviously with no whaling industry in Australia there are only people fitting in categories 1 and 2. In Japan, there's people in all 3 categories, with people in category 2 making up the majority.

The secret will be in coming up with really convincing arguments that persuade people who are OK with sustainable harvests of biological resources to make an exception in the case of whales.

After more about quarter of a century of searching for such convincing arguments the anti-whaling camp hasn't been able to find any such persuasive arguments, and as such I personally think that they should accept internationally regulated whaling at conservative levels, with the condition that research into improve whale killing methods continues.

So can we worry about environmental issues for a change instead?

Posted by: david on January 21, 2008 6:56 PM

RowdyP, whales are intelligent mammals, chickens are not. They know what is happening to them when being run down and harpooned. You can protest against battery eggs by not buying them.

Chickens, cows, sheep etc are bred to slaughter, whales are wild mammals living in a so called 'sanctuary'.

Posted by: Ceeceerider on January 21, 2008 6:57 PM

Good old Sea Shepherd - "Who cares if we are wrong? Let's throw acid!" Yes, a fine upstanding part of the environmental lobby there. In reality, they have hardened the resolve of Japan on this issue and virtually guaranteed that a generation of Japanese will not be receptive to anti whaling debate. But I am sure they enjoy the violence. Gee, if you were the wife of one of these thugs you would want to make sure you had the housework done on time!

Acid, c'mon. Sure, okay, technically it was acid, but it was just a little old stink bomb. A primary school means of attacking someone. It's about as threatening as a whoopee cushion.

Posted by: gav on January 21, 2008 7:15 PM

Franco,

If actions taken by the public really works, many issues would have been resolved by now, such as sending troops to Iraq, reconciliation with Aboriginal people.... Do you remember the big march held by people who feel sorry for them? There's been nothing remarkable done after that event yet.

By the way, for people who don't think that Japan provides any research findings, they've got heaps published on their web page which is available both in English and Japanese.

I want a lot more information from Australian side to prove that we can research whales without hurting them, including how many and how much what kind of food they eat in details and how to build a reliable model to help their commercial fishing plans for catching various fishes.

Could anyone provide me with such info or web links, please? I'm keen to learn more.

Posted by: Uki on January 21, 2008 7:20 PM

Yawn. Who cares ? Surely there are more important things to worry about ?

Posted by: Bruce Smith on January 21, 2008 7:24 PM

The hypocrisy of some people posting here is astounding! We stopped whaling so they can. If petroleum hadn't been discovered, the old whaling nations would still be whaling, they'd have an WPEC and they'd be going to war to protect their exclusivity.
Or..boycott Japanese goods! Do the people who make such idiotic comments engage their brain beforehand?
Wake up and smell the roses! No rational person accepts your arguments. What's more, it's embarrassing that such comments are coming from supposedly informed Australians. The Japanese will only be engaged through rational objective dialogue. To do otherwise is just to confirm we ARE stupid in their eyes!

Posted by: harry goto on January 21, 2008 7:26 PM

Don,

You said,
"I have to admit, I've never tried whale meat � sorry, I mean, never conducted valuable primary whale research � so I don't know what I'm missing. But then again, I've never eaten human either, for similar moral reasons."

Hey Don, you've been eating various mammals, including beef and pork and lamb. Or are you vegetarian?

I haven't eaten either human or whale meat Dom but morals don't come into it.

Posted by: Daytub @hotmail.com on January 21, 2008 7:46 PM

It's funny how everyone misses the point that Dom is making. As I read it, his article is NOT about the rights and wrongs of inflicting harm on animals, whales vs roos, environmentalists, etc.

Basically, the issue is that if hardly anyone eats whale meat, there are no worthwhile scientific results, the people doing the whaling are not the cultural descendants of original Japanese whalers, and the Government props up the industry - why do it?

Maybe that's the interesting cultural phenomenom here - that Japanese like to spend their tax dollars propping up inefficient industries for the sake of pride.

On the other hard, we have farmers...

Oops!

Posted by: asl on January 21, 2008 8:19 PM

I wonder if you think bombing people to bits in their sleep is humane? How about starving them to death while we moralise about contraception?

What about cutting off their oil and energy supplies, cutting off all food in and out and destroying the lives of 1.5 million people to punish a few?

Got any clues about the humanity of any of this Dom?

28,000 kids under 5 die every day of the year while over 1 billion people are obese and trying to save whales.

Some twisted morality don't you think?

Posted by: Marilyn on January 21, 2008 8:25 PM

I dont see why whaling, provided its controlled, is actually such a bad thing?

With the amount of international monitoring Japan is subject to it seems unfair that we might legalise whaling for, say, the United States and for other smaller nations (including those that use much cruder methods of acquisition) and not for Japan.

I understand that most of the whaling permits issued each negotiation are not only issued on cultural grounds, but also for acts to be conducted by culturally relevant and acceptable means. I would submit that while a state of the art 'ship' which might look a little different from its 'scientific predecessor' does not conform to cultural precedent - perhaps the newer model is at least slightly more humane than the older one.

The argument is that perhaps we should consider legalising drugs (or at least decriminalising them) so that a conversation can begin for users and those with socially unacceptable problems with drugs can be treated rather than incarcerated (which would likely only increase the problem). Surely, if we were able to allow Japan to come out of the closet, admit they are purely using permits for food and provide them with a forum to apply for intended use (rather than feigned use) we could perhaps increase the effectiveness of the 'conversation' intended with Japan.

Alternatively, perhaps the japanese will be able to come up with bonsai whale farming! Though, that might increase the price.

Posted by: kate on January 21, 2008 9:14 PM

Incidentally - couldnt it be argued that the 'ships' are, perhaps, in keeping with another of Japan's traditional pieces of culture - that of technology?

Admittedly, i'm not one for it, but there are advocates of eating koala ... clearly being a fluffy mammal rather than a slimey one, you wont agree. but, who am i to say that eating koala is not the finger licking experience it might reputedly be (on this point, kangaroos are pests and deserve to be eaten and otherwise slaughtered at any available opportunity - they are evil, rabid and dangerous beasts and anyone who says otherwise has not encountered one on a dark and stormy evening - though joeys have such soft soft fur)!

It is interesting that you would accept that regulation is not the answer. At least, you generally seem to think that regulation rather than outlawing is the answer - except of course when it comes to whales.

How very un-liberal democratic of you Dom, shame!

Posted by: kate on January 21, 2008 9:30 PM

If we want to persuade the Japanese to stop whaling the method is easy. Just take heaps of film of whales being killed and screen it on the internet. Over a few years public opinion would swing against the Japs that to save face they would have to stop.

Posted by: PeterinBrisbane on January 21, 2008 9:34 PM

I eat and enjoy all kinds of meat, but I am trying to reduce it to special occasions. Why? Ithink the whole scenario of killing other animals to eat is rather primitive. There are many primitive customs and instincts that were useful to help the species survive and prosper, but are now not only unnecessary, but downright unhelpful.

It is hard to find a good argument why the Japanese should not eat whale meat (provided the hunted species are not endangered) while we eat our beef, chicken, et al. However, there are good arguments for banning whale hunting as part of a process leading humanity toward a more civilised, humane and smarter existence.

Vegetable matter is a more more efficient source of protein than meat. Meat, particularly beef, is associated with greenhouse gas pollution, an increasingly critical consideration. Meat requires more water than most crops, an issue because of the more arid conditions associated with climate change. Meat eaters have a significantly greater incidence of bowel cancer than non-meat eaters. Finally, ceasing to live off death has got be good for our psyches, both individual and collective.

Posted by: Bobuc on January 21, 2008 9:58 PM

OK, you were exposed to a liberal brain-washing from Greenpeace etc from the moment you were born, the end result being your "morals" and your perception that killing whales for food is bad.

Now imagine not having been brainwashed, and assesing whale as a potential food source, alongside all the other methods that put different creatures on your table. Yes, they are all cruel, but hey, at least whale is free range, and as far as we know, killing a couple of thousand a year is completely SUSTAINABLE. You might then not feel compelled to criticise others for their food choices, in fact, ethically speaking, you might see that eating whale actually makes sense.

And while you paint yourself as a big Japanophile you seem comfortable only with the extreme superficial aspects of the culture.

Which would explain your refusal to acknowledge the part of first world european nations in KILLING WHALES (half of what are currently taken on the recent figures). Just like the Japanese do. Because its easier to inflame those old hatreds in service of your irrational anti-whaling-jihad, than it is to stand up and slam those cultures uncomfortably close to your own, like the Norweigans, the Danish, the Icelandic etc etc. Greenpeace knows this, which is why it stays well away from European whaling politics and concentrates in its entirely spineless way upon the yellow peril.

All the publicity, all those tossers in rubber duckys, its all about hits on the Greenpeace website and donation bucks.

What an easy, simplistic, completely bogus stance.

Posted by: Tom-san on January 21, 2008 10:22 PM

We should be lobbying the IWC into putting a stop to Japan sticken their middle finger up at us. I couldnt care less if they killed whales for research in their water but the act of going thousands of miles out of their way to say these arnt your waters we can do what we want and you can go shove it pisses me of to no end

Posted by: Luke on January 21, 2008 10:28 PM

Ceeceerider,

By that reasoning, suggesting its ok to eat and kill chickens because they are not intelligent. So, given that reasoning it would be ok to eat mentally impaired people because they are not intelligent.

Chickens, cows and sheep, believe it or not, were once wild animals too. You cannot choose to eat some meat and not others based on what species they are, that is called speciesism.

I believe the research of the Japanese to be a farce but whaling has a heritage that dates back over a thousand years. I think people need to focus on more important things such as thousands of people dying each day from hunger or inhumane treatment.

Just a thought, just a thought.

Posted by: Adam on January 21, 2008 11:20 PM

I personally dont see what the big deal is. I dont mind the Japanese eating Whale. Just because we in the west love the animals, doesn't mean everyone does. I find it ironic that we can act so self-righteously in this topic, especially when Australians are the highest or second highest carbon dioxide per capita emitters. I recognise that harpooning is cruel but so is live shipment of animals and most forms of industrialised animal husbandry and i dont think you are calling for an end to that. I think the Japanese have just as much reason to not let the whales become extinct, after all they eat them, so i think we can trust the Japanese to hunt sustainably.

I also think it is infinatley simplistic to say one set of values is better than others. I actually think that is dangerous because it encourages people avoid empathy and reason and stick with brainless slogans. Sure I like whales, but i dont like the idea of one culture emposing their beliefs over another even more. Just think about what other cultures would think of us. The Hindus would think we are evil for killing and eating cows, especially after they provide us with life giving milk. The Muslims and Jews would think dirty for eating pig.

Posted by: Chenny on January 21, 2008 11:48 PM

The completely simplistic, bogus stance Tom-san is the persistence of the Japamese whaling industry and the Japanese government in insisting that when they kill whales they do it in the name of scientific research.
This is nothing more than a blatant lie.
Perhaps if they had the guts to admit what they're doing is actually not scientific research but slaughtering whales for their home food market they might find a more receptive audience.
But I doubt it as their continual lies and deception over the years, not to mention their bribes and standover tactics on smaller countries who are recipients of their foreign aid to vote in favour of Japan at the IWC has sullied their image world wide.
The idea that they would lose 'face' by discontinuing whaling is a joke as they lost it a long time ago with their arrogant attitude in the face of the world wide condemnation of their so called scientific research.

Posted by: Stephen F on January 22, 2008 12:01 AM

I have no ethical objection to eating whale, in the same way I don't have any concern about eating a cow.

I have eaten in Japan and found sashimi style to be quite an interesting taste and complemented various tuna cuts nicely. Cooked whale though I find to be too strong a flavor for my personal taste.

But that’s it really the point, personal (or cultural) tastes differ. In the same way, some people like beef but wont eat venison or rabbit.

Most Japanese I speak to on this really don't really care about Australian's attitudes to whale food, but if pressed raise the point that if Australians don't want to eat it, then that’s fine, but also point out that most Japanese don't want to eat Kangaroo either (but don't wish to force their cultural ideas on to us).

Posted by: Jaybe on January 22, 2008 1:42 AM

Just what does pride have to do with killing whales?

Posted by: Peter on January 22, 2008 1:56 AM

I support Sea Shepherd with my dollars. First, the "research"and "cultural" arguments are bogus, and second, more moderate voices have been given plenty of time to end whaling.

Posted by: Richard on January 22, 2008 2:11 AM

I have eaten whale meat and whale skin (the primary Inuit delicacy which is served at every major family celebration) several times in Greenland. In most of the Arctic a balance has been struck between subsistence hunting and species conservation, because of the importance of the whale and other local animals to the culture and diet of the Inuit. There is obviously a big dose of cultural hypocrisy in criticism of Japanese whaling. Perhaps it would be better for the IWC to allow subsistence hunting and consumption of smaller and more numerous whale species by Japanese coastal fishermen, and ban the larger ocean-going whaling vessels.

Posted by: dave on January 22, 2008 2:46 AM

On what basis is it claimed that whaling is sustainable ? Because the Japanese say so? One would have to be both gullible and ill-informed to believe this.

Also I would be very interested if these people who talk about whaling sustainability can provide a real life example of sustainable fisheries because the fact is that on a world wide basis fish stocks are crashing because of over-fishing and environmental damage. The claim of whaling sustainability also assumes there are no other threats to whales population whereas there are many other threats particularly food depletion,plastic litter, pollution, sonar disturbance and ship collisions. It is the whalers case which relies on deception and emotion, the facts actually support whaling's opponents

Posted by: nadia on January 22, 2008 8:04 AM

Why doesn't the "Steve Irwin" track those boats laden with thousands of live sheep heading for the Middle East?

Is it maybe that sheep don't quite make the cut for what is classed as "Intelligent meat"?

Thankfully India don't raise the issue with International Law Courts about the slaughter of beef! (we'd probably still have the hide to consider them as bad sports).

I had a huge argument with a Japanese mate (in Japan, and in Japanese I'll have you know, and as much as anyone can have an argument with what basically turned out to be a slightly tipsy, smiling and friendly brick wall) about whale meat.

I told him why I thought it was wrong, that there aren't many whales around, and really there is very little evidence of anyone but certain fishing villages actually hunting whales before WWII, when everyone ran out of food and they were eating grass. Therefore it is not culture as such, it is invented culture bolstered by pride and business, at the heart of it.

No Japanese person buys the 'research' line either, because they (like me) see the whale meat in the supermarket every day.

So my Japanese mate starts to argue the whole "Well you eat kangaroos, and they're *cute*" (subtext: how could you eat something so cute you monster?!?!), with me then explaining that there are lots more kangaroos around than whales, and when we shoot them they die a lot faster, and frankly kangaroo meat tastes good and whale tastes like screaming babies (yes, I accidentally ate it once, I thought it was jelly actually).

Despite current rumblings that maybe there aren't as many roos around as we think, they're big rodents with tiny brains that taste good, and whales are huge creatures that live in families and talk to each other, and keep whole ecosystems functioning.

At the end of the argument, I realised I was talking to the aforementioned smiling brick wall, and that as long as the Japanese people keep believing that having whale in the supermarket is a right borne to them by history, the whole issue will be as untenable as Britney Spears' custody case.

Posted by: Clare on January 22, 2008 9:00 AM

Dom, I find it difficult to criticise the Japanese for whaling when I'm more than happy to eat a lot of other kinds of meat. What if the world's Hindu population started getting up in arms about people eating cattle? I mean, I doubt slaughterhouses are humane places, but it certainly wouldn't stop me from enjoying a steak.
Admittedly, the fact that whales are endangered should be a brake on the whole thing, but the rest of the arguments...I don't know...unless they come from militant vegans, they smack of hypocrisy to me.

Posted by: el mariachi on January 22, 2008 9:12 AM

It seems a lot of people just refuse to see the point of this well-written intelligent article. If they stopped being so emotional and stubborn for a moment they might actually understand the issues better and be able to engage in rational debate. Funny isn't it. That's exactly the problem with the Japanese insisting on mass slaughter of whales. I saw a tv documentary about ordinary Japanese guys in little boats fishing for whale in a more traditional style off the coast of Japan. They are having trouble selling their whale meat because the limited market is flooded - presumably by the hi-tech "researchers".

Posted by: Jacki on January 22, 2008 9:19 AM

Very well put Don, I couldn'thave said it better myself. And while they're at it can the Japanese stop sluaghtering dolphins? They kill about 2,000 between November and February in Taiji. It's horrible.

Posted by: Rosa on January 22, 2008 9:28 AM

I agree that whaling should end.

However, I have a problem with a couple of the arguments given here that I believe need to be addressed in order to have a fair debate.

Firstly: "We aren't talking about a flotilla of small, traditional fishing boats using centuries-old techniques". It could be said that it is part of Australia's culture to farm sheep. But we don't still use horse and dray, or shear with hand operated shears. The argument that old techniques should be used is not valid.

Secondly: "what do you learn about the 935th dead whale that the first 934 didn't tell you?" If we assume that they really are doing legitimate research, then it is necessary to have a sufficiently large sample size to answer the desired question. The type of question that Dom posed shows a lack of understanding of research and statistics.

I agree that many Japanese people do not eat whale meat, so it might not be culturally important, and I agree that calling it research is questionable to say the least. However, if you are going to argue against whaling using this position, you must be very sure about the evidence behind your argument!

Posted by: Barry on January 22, 2008 9:34 AM

Thanks for putting it so eloquently Dom. I love so many aspects of Japanese culture: food, anime & films, art, gardens, cermaics, clothing etc but I am totally opposed to whaling. Not to Japan, not to Japanese culture or the Japanese people - just whaling.

Thank goodness our government is finally doing more. And thank goodness for Sea Shepherd - they have my ardent support in all forms. It takes a lot of guts, personal strength & commitment not to mention (professional experience at sea) to get on a ricketty old boat and head down to one of the remotest places on earth to face a fleet many times your size and actively get between the whales and the harpoons. Paul Watson and all who serve with Sea Shepherd - you guys are heros!

Posted by: phae on January 22, 2008 9:40 AM

Tom-san: "at least whale is free range, and as far as we know, killing a couple of thousand a year is completely SUSTAINABLE"

Two issues with what you say - the first is that with whales being top-of-food-chain predators, they tend to be contaiminated with mercury and organochlorides, common in all marine top level predators. Source: Japanese research. Shame you don't read what little research they do produce. You might also try looking up 'Minamata disease' and the reasons why a lot of Japanese won't touch whale meat, and why it is more commonly used as pet food - mercury poisoning.

Secondly: 'sustainable' is a word that has been hijacked by economists. You don't find out if a species is sustainable by killing large proportions of it's population.

Thridly: Read some history. the modern Japanese whaling fleet was an idea of General MacArthur, the US Military governor of Japan immediately post WWII, as a food source since Japan's agricultural economy was shattered. It's also a shame this is rarely mentioned - perhaps because we don't want to upset the US as well? The world at large seems to be forever clearing up the messes that the US has made.

While we're on the topic - native whaling (Inuit and Australian Aboriginal - if still being carried out, not sure about that) should be stopped too. If a 'native' tribe claimed canabalism is traditional should we allow that under 'freedom of belief'? Clearly, there are some activities that are not appropriate in today's world; canabalism, whaling, racism, genocide, extermination of species; all are abhorent and should be banned.

Posted by: Adrian Esdaile on January 22, 2008 9:43 AM

I fully support the Japanese culture and its tradition of whaling, so long as it is confined to traditional Japanese waters and used only with the original traditional methods.

Posted by: Jason Li on January 22, 2008 10:03 AM

Whales are contributing to global warming. By eating plankton they are devouring the biggest source of carbon dioxide storage in the world's oceans. With whale numbers increasing, there is a proportionate decrease in plankton. We need to eliminate whales in order to save the planet from global warming.

Posted by: Mary Jo Minogue on January 22, 2008 10:10 AM

Yes I've thought the same as Karl, where are the research results. These Japanese 'researchers' should be asked to stand up and be counted, and asked to explain what what they have or haven't delivered. See how their pride feels then. So how about it some of you current and 'current' affairs programs.

Posted by: Don on January 22, 2008 10:19 AM

Do you really think Japan care about what we think? How about we practice what we preach and stop fishing tuna, prawns, lobster etc etc. If these do gooder hippies have so much time on their hands, they should pay more attention to some of the social issues in this country.

Posted by: adam davies on January 22, 2008 10:29 AM

How about a scientific study linking consumption of whale meat to a decline in sexual desire. Now that would harm the whaling demand no end. Jusrt look at other endanger4ed species due to some obscure connection to aphrodisiac qualities...shot to extinction for a dried penis or shaved horn.

Whales make you limp and dry as a dingos. Now that'd be some worthy whale research.

Posted by: DaddyC on January 22, 2008 10:39 AM

Marilyn, would you also like Dom to explain polio and the incredibly short life of my iPod?
The topic today in question is extermination of a species, which is an issue just as important as the ones you've raised. I'm sure Dom has got and probably will do so again to them in another post. I am in complete agreement about what takes priority in the news, but you write as if Dom blogs only about whales day in, day out.

Perhaps "dogmatic and stubborn" is a broad generalisation, but they were the defining traits of my experiences with Japanese work culture. Of course there are many other worthy and wonderful things about Japanese culture, but that is not the issue here so I simply cut to the chase. In many ways their culture is very rigid and very proud, and losing face is a very big deal to them. So I believe that the more Japan is pressured by the rest of the world to give up whaling, the more they will dig their heels in and insist on doing it, despite the lack of demand or need for whale meat and despite the "cultural importance" being a transparent untruth. They will continue to do it whether or not Greenpeace send protest boats to annoy them with the world watching, because to back down at this point would be damaging to their sense of national pride. I believe that getting the Japanese people themselves to agitate for change will have more effect, allowing the government a loophole in their pride to make a decision based on serving their own people rather than bowing to international pressure.

Posted by: franco on January 22, 2008 10:58 AM

The problem with the debate over whaling is that for almost every argument against it there is a justifiable counter-argument.

You say the cultural argument seems fairly bogus but your definition of culture seems to be restricted to traditional hunting methods. Food is a huge part of culture. And culture is ever-changing... Hundreds of years ago the Japanese used traditional fishing boats and centuries-old techniques, today they use a modern mechanised fleet. Hundreds of years ago they used traditional recipes to prepare whale dishes, today they sell whale hamburgers. The tradition is one of eating whale meat and it is a part of Japanese culture.

You say a large majority of Japanese have never eaten or rarely eat whale but did you ever care to think why? For many years after the ban of commercial whaling, whale became an expensive delicacy that few people could afford. I think international opinion has also had an effect.

I also think you didn't completely understand what Shima meant with his comment about pride. My understanding is that it's not so much that Japan is proud of its culture but more that Japan's pride has been dented and there is increasing desire among Japanese people for it to be restored. Dented by what? Dented by two atomic bombs, by a constitution rewritten by another country, by repeated refusals of Japan's requests to join the UN Security Council, by the numerous US army bases dotted throughout the country... By six decades of the Western world dictating what it can and can't do.

You imply that the scientific research claim is a sham. Perhaps it is.. I honestly don't know. But did it ever occur to you that while the commercial whaling ban is in place, it is the only way the Japanese can continue whaling and thereby uphold their cultural tradition?

You also speak about cultural relativism and state that there are times when one set of values are purely and simply better. On this point I have to purely and simply disagree. There is no such thing as a universal set of values as to what is right and wrong.

But we could argue about that until the sacred cows come home...

The more meaningful point re. cultural relativism is that it's all good and fine to label it as wrong just as long as you're not guilty of the same wrongdoing. And unfortunately, Australia is. (Read about Australia's treatment of kangaroos here: http://www.animalliberation.org.au/comkang.php)

This makes us a nation of hypocrites and essentially invalidates our anti-whaling stance.

I believe:

- YES, animals SHOULD be killed humanely and on a needs-basis.

- YES, animals SHOULD be protected from extinction.

BUT ultimately, until we, Australians, fix up our own act and ditch the cultural attacks (particularly those with references to atrocities committed by Japanese soldiers during WWII), our campaign to save the whales is nothing more than emotional blubbering.

Posted by: sidinam on January 22, 2008 11:06 AM

The thing with whaling is that it is an emotional issue that also involves national pride. Imagine the furore that would erupt here if for example internationally cricket was declared an offensive throwback to an era of colonialism and all countries of the world should cease playing it immediately. The outcry would be enormous and rational or irrational arguments would all be disregarded as "an attempt to undermine our way of life". Perhaps eventually we would stop but there would be a period of protests international condemnation.

Now this probably seems to trivialise the situation but really the same thing is happening with Japan. Something that was a part of their culture is now regarded as cruel and unnecessary by the majority of the world but because it involves national pride any argument we come up with will not work. What makes it worse is that we make allowances for a whole range of other countries to whale as it is part of their culture so naturally Japan and Iceland and Norway (lets not forget they're in this as well) will continue to play the "cultural heritage" angle.

Now I happen to think that whaling is really dumb for a number of reasons and I fully support what Sea Sheppard is doing cause Greenpeace are very good at taking photos of whales but spending three minutes in front of a whaling vessel so it can't hit the whale and then moving once you've turned the camera off is gross hypocrisy in my opinion. However I really don't think this will work as it just reinforces the feeling in Japan that their culture is under attack.

If they must whale and they claim cultural relevance I say make them give up the explosive harpoons and the huge fleets make them hunt whales in little boats with hand thrown harpoons and restrict them to their waters like their cultural heritage says they did. The whales will have a fighting chance and being a whaler won't be as attractive.

Posted by: Steve on January 22, 2008 11:16 AM

I blame Greenpeace.
If they could let go of their cash cow of the sea campaign, then perhaps the Japanese public's ongoing disinterest in eating whale meat would be paid heed to and the face saving insistance that 'research' is the motivation could stop.

Posted by: SLR on January 22, 2008 11:26 AM

Leaving the moral arguments aside for a moment, there appears to be a significant portion of people posting here that seem to feel that there is some form of 'sustainable harvest' option available.

We have no idea what the effect the whaling has on the oceanic ecosystem. It could be catastrophic. It might be sustainable. We don't know how many whales are in most whale populations, which whale populations are actually being slaughtered (no other word for it - it is a barbaric practice, taking many hours for a whale to die), or whether it is actually having an effect on the health of any given community. It could be leading to imbalance in any of the ecosystems these whales travel through (including the barrier reef) that could be catastrophic to these environments.

For example, there is a significant issue of our southern kelp forests, home to a large variety of life, where an imbalance of urchins is destroying this habitat. Theory's abound as to the cause (overfishing of crayfish for example), but urchins have a larval stage that may well be diet to whales, for example. I'm no marine biologist, but the simple fact is we dont know - ecosystems are very complex things.

For something to be claimed as sustainable, the burden of proof must be on those making the claim. We have to be conservative with ALL our oceans resources - demonstrated by Australian fisheries policies, or we risk losing a lot.

Japan has proven completely incapable of managing their oceanic resources. They have over-fished their waters to the point of almost complete ecosystem collapse. They have been doing the same for the tuna in the southern oceans. I for one would not accept their word on anything.

As to those that somehow feel that statics on human death rates in other nations is somehow making a point - if we fail to manage our earthly resources, far more will die.

Lastly, I believe that any intelligent species (as a whole) has the same right to survival as humans. That whales are intelligent should be obvious to anyone who as actually been near one. Humans are a plague on this planet, until we learn to make use of what limited resources we have in a sustainable manner, lets at least ensure that we don't lose entire species because of ignorance, pride and greed.

Posted by: Simon Finn on January 22, 2008 11:51 AM

"You say a large majority of Japanese have never eaten or rarely eat whale but did you ever care to think why? For many years after the ban of commercial whaling, whale became an expensive delicacy that few people could afford. I think international opinion has also had an effect."

Commercial whaling was for oil, not meat. Whale is commony eaten in Japan and it is cheap. Go there and look in izakaya menus for the kanji. Whale meat "an expensive delicacy"!!! Pure comedy!

Posted by: gav on January 22, 2008 12:02 PM

Brief mention has been made of Indians and cows. I will tell you my experience, as an Indian, moving to live in Australia. The amount of meat eaten shocked me. Do you really need to eat meat every day? I understood that in Western culture you eat cows. But is it necessary and will you suffer if you stopped? The arguement that eating cows is OK because they are bred for this purpose is even more abhorrent. In India cows are like pets. We name them and they provide milk for the family. If you wanted to eat meat you have to go out of your way to a "non-veg" restaurant. We do not eat cows in the the same way Aussies don't eat dog. However, Western culture is what I aspire to, hence I can get my head around this. In the same fashion I understand why one eats whale. It baffles me how whales are now sacred in Australia, whereas Kangaroos have not been given this status. If anything good comes out of this anti-whaling campaign, apart from cessation of whaling, is that all animals will deserve similar respect. Please Australia, stop eating cows.

Posted by: Rajan on January 22, 2008 12:21 PM

It's time Japan woke up to the fact that not all ancient customs are acceptable in today's world.

It's long past time to stop whaling.

Posted by: Ruxton on January 22, 2008 12:24 PM

Many note the lie that is whaling for research. It is a lie. Japan is hunting for food more than research. But when has telling a lie stopped anything. We invaded Iraq based on the biggest lie of all. News today of more bombings in Iraq and more dead children no doubt. Are all the activists too busy saving whales to care? It would seem so.

Posted by: Rajan on January 22, 2008 12:34 PM

Your argument, I'm afraid, holds no water (sorry about painful pun). If there's enough of them, they should be available to be eaten/made into dogmeat, or whatever any other country wants to do with them, just like any other creature *in principle*. To state otherwise is simply hypocritical, given Western/Australian treatment and use of a wide variety of animals.

Whales are big and live a long time. Otherwise they're just like any other animal. There is nothing CATEGORICALLY different about them. Therefore, they should be available as food.

I say Japan should leave the IWU if it continues to be rigged in the way it is. Just leave and get on with it (in a sustainable way) rather than leave yourself open to ridicule because you're forced to do it under the "research" clause.

The level of hysteria in Australia on this issue is beyond bizarre. Before arguing that Japan is "dogmatic and stubborn," take a good look in the mirror. Australia strikes me very much the same (and I'm Australian).

Posted by: tokyorequiem on January 22, 2008 12:50 PM

May as well just re post from the blog a few days ago, plus a little bit.

The problem with the issue of detirmining the right and wrong of hunting whales is it's so muddied by an extension of the cute furry animal syndrome. Public campaigns to save areas of ecological significance are boosted enormously if there is something cute and furry living there. When applied to whales in terms of being hunted to eat using statements such as "how could they kill such beautiful creatures" by otherwise meat eaters gives those for whaling the right to use the word hypocrite. Ask many Hindus what they think about us eating cows.

Whether they are cute, furry, querky, graceful etc should have nothing to do with it. To me the issues with whaling are:

Whether the whale is a threatened species or not. With 80 odd species of whales and dolfins this comes down the the individual species level, not all whales. Minke definately aren't, for humpbacks there's conjecture, not sure about others but at least it has clear scientific principles that can be applied to it even if the science is a little short on data.

The barbarity of harpooning an animal to kill it for food. This seems unacceptable and perhaps it should be. But then there are plenty of fish that are long lined (or caught by fisherman) and no one cares about that. Interestingly they care about the albatrosses but not the fish. The convenient excuse that fish don't feel pain is disproven. Certainly exploding harpoons from ships into whales looks pretty extreme than a simple hook but the whale is likely to die much quicker. Perhaps long lining itself is unacceptable and we should not allow it. But then the alternative is netting/dredging which destoys entire ecosystems with significantly more bycatch - but perhaps less pain.

Does whales' increased intelligence make it less acceptable. Once again - there's 80 odd species - which ones are more or less intelligent and anyway studies are showing the intelligence of fish to be much greater than previousely thought. If this is to become an arguement then an individual needs to make a value judgement as to what level of intelligence it is 1, OK to kill an animal for food and 2, kill in the manner it's done.

Considering all this I can't see how the issue is as black and white as it's portrayed. The only people that can really take the moral high ground in this are the vegos. Though the vegans may argue they're barbaric. Personally I'm happy to live in a world of grey areas - but perhaps that's just an excuse to eat what I want and ride my bike at stupid speeds and the myriad other things that many of us do that could be argued to be wrong in one way or another. If you want to be black and white about issues then you must be consistant or risk being called a hypocrite.

I do see the issues above as something to consider and do think they will be solved one day. Technology will eventually solve them for us as I'm sure high grade factory grown meat without a brain will be grown and we will be looked back on this as the age of barbarism. As it is now, it's modern technology that allows the vegan lifestyle to be so easily followed. I bet there would be many fewer vegans without the age of oil to produce easily obtainable synthetic alternatives... hang on... is that a truly moral alternative.

As discussed in the article, the thing that urks me most about the Japanese approach is the deceit. The cultural and research excuses. I sometimes wonder if the whole reason for defying the whaling ban is to divert attention from the overfishing of Tuna and other endangered species which don't get the 'cute and furry' attention that whales do. Now that I really find reprehensible.

Posted by: MikeT on January 22, 2008 1:11 PM

The solution is simple. Stop buying Toyotas, Hondas etc and let the sales dude know the reason you aren't buying is because of Japanese whaling. It would be all over in 3 months.

Posted by: Uncle Buck on January 22, 2008 1:57 PM

I've eaten whale meat once at an otherwise very acceptable sushi restaurant in Japan. It was bland and it was chewy. You wouldn't bother with it.

Posted by: joseph on January 22, 2008 2:02 PM

Whaling on the high seas is only a recent 'culturally significant" activity for the Japanese. Sure, they have been hacking up dolphins and pilot whales in their hundreds, in their own waters, for centuries, for that, good luck to them.

But it seems to have been forgotten that they had set their sights on bigger prey this year, proposing to harpoon humpback whales as well... and this species is far from secure at this time. I acknowledge that humpbacks suffered greatly at the hands of Australian whalers earlier this century too.

I see the Japanese as very significant and careless raiders of the world's resources, whether it is timber from the rainforests of other countries, bluefin tuna from our Southern Ocean (remember how they fudged the figures disgracefully over decades on that catch, and have driven the species almost to extinction?) or in this case, whales.

They have a massive and highly efficient fishing fleet, they are manipulative (witness Japan's behaviour at the IWC meetings year after year), they have been dishonest in the past and they will get away with whatever they can in the future.

I hope they continue to feel the increasing heat of scrutiny of their oceangoing activities. It needs to be done... full marks to Sea Shepherd and everyone else involved. And at last we have a government which seems to take the matter seriously as well...